Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition : First Impressions

So, its finally here. Having had a few nights to flick through the new Players Handbook and digest what I've come across (as well as make up a few characters, some new, some rewrites of old favourites), here are my first impressions...

After the unmitigated catastrophe that was D&D 4th Edition (in my not so humble opinion anyway) I can safely say that expectations were... low. Now, don't get me wrong, 4th Edition had some good ideas, but it also had a lot of bad ones too, and it just didn't FEEL like D&D. It felt (and played) more like a boardgame, or a tabletop version of World of Warcraft than an actual RPG. Needless to say a large number of players, myself included, either stuck with D&D 3.5 or moved on to Pathfinder rather than switch to what they saw as the "kiddy" version of their game.

Can 5th Edition win me back? Well, the answer to that question is a resounding... maybe! Here we go...

The Fluff :

I don't have much to say about the background at the moment, mostly because there isn't much of it in the book. Which you'd expect really, it's a rulebook, not a campaign setting. That said I've got to say that it feels good to get back to The Forgotten Realms, to Greyhawk, to Dragonlance, even to the relative newcomer of the group Eberron. I've a lot of fondness for these worlds (the first three mainly, but I do quite like Eberron) and it pleases me that all three of them are mentioned in the players handbook, along with lists of deities and short extracts from published novels set in Toril, Krynn etc.

Having all the settings unified by a single set of rules right from the start is a great way to not only unify the settings and establish a core set of rules across the board but also to titillate geeks like me who love crossovers and the like. Come on Wizards, you KNOW you want to start republishing Spelljammer...

Seriously, do it. I will buy and play the SHIT out of it if you do.

That said I do have one or two little niggles, the main one being the art. Some of the art in the book is absolutely wonderful, some of it is absolute garbage. For example compare the illustration of the Sorcerer on page 99, which is excellent, to the race art for the Halfling on page 26, which is terrible. Wizards of the Coast really have no excuse for bad art considering some of the talent they have access to.

My other main niggle is entirely a personal one. Some of the characters depicted in the book are famous ones from novels and settings, for example the Character Creation example character is Bruenor Battlehammer of Dragonlance fame. The race art for the Elf? Drizzt Do Fucking Urden. Is it just me or should a sample character be representative of their race as a whole? Or at least the most common conceptions thereof? Bruenor is an archetypal dwarf, surly, proud, and fiercely loyal to his friends. Drizzt on the other hand is an anomaly, an aberration, a renegade and most definitely NOT a typical Drow, or even a typical Elf! Its not as if there weren't plenty of other Elves they could have used instead, Laurana Kanan for example?

Yes, this is an entirely personal and irrational quibble. I'm not going to apologise for it.

The Crunch :

Moving on... overall the rules of the game are considerably simplified, and strangely remind me strongly of 1st and 2nd edition D&D as much as they do the more recent editions. The main change to the core mechanics is that almost everything is based around Ability Score tests instead of Skill Checks, Saving Throws and BAB based Attack Rolls. For example, when caught by a Fireball instead of making a Reflex Saving Throw a character will instead make a Dexterity Saving Throw.

The other major change is to how exactly characters get better at these checks and tests. Instead of each class having a Base Attack Bonus, Saving Throws and Skill Points that increase at variable rates they instead have a list of Proficiencies and a Proficiency Bonus. These proficiencies can be Armour, Weapons, Skills, Saves or Tools, whilst the bonus increases at a set rate dependant on the characters overall level. These bonuses can either apply to checks or can be used to set the Difficulty Class for checks made by others.

Example 1 : When making an attack roll with a melee weapon a player rolls a good old D20, adds their characters Strength Bonus, and if said character is proficient with whatever weapon they're using, their Proficiency Bonus. If they aren't proficient, they simply roll 1D20 and add their strength bonus. A level 8 Fighter with a Strength Score of 18 would roll 1d20+7 (+3 Proficiency Bonus, +4 Strength Bonus).
Example 2 :  When casting a spell that allows a saving throw the Save DC is 8 plus the spellcasters Proficiency Bonus, plus the appropriate Ability Score Modifier. A level 15 Wizard with an Intelligence Score of 20 would have a Save DC of 18 (8 base, +5 Proficiency Bonus, +5 Intelligence Bonus).

I like this, its reminiscent of other Attribute based systems such as the various 40k Roleplay games. Its a robust and versatile way of dealing with the challenges thrown at a party, and lends itself to adaptation in the hands of a clever DM or players. There are numerous other changes to the rules of course, here are some of the main changes that have caught my eye...

• Advantages / Disadvantages : Instead of granting bonuses to checks or ability scores most spells and effects instead grant an Advantage or Disadvantage. Mechanically this allows a character to roll the D20 for a test twice, and take the highest result. For example the Enhance Ability spell (which replaces Bears Endurance, Bulls Strength etc.) grants an Advantage to checks based on one ability score for the duration of the spell.
  
• Ability Scores : Ability scores work the same way they do in 3.5/Pathfinder, with the interesting caveat they they're capped at 20 for player characters. Additionally all characters gain a +2 bonus to an ability score of their choice (or a +1 bonus to two different ability scores) every 4 levels, meaning that a character will cap out their most important ability scores pretty quickly.
• Class Archetypes : Each class has two or more Archetypes, chosen within the first few levels. In addition to Wizard Schools, Sorcerer Bloodlines and Cleric Domains Barbarians choose a Primal Path, Bards a College, Monks a Monastic Tradition and so on and so forth. This is a nice idea, and includes some very interesting options. For example a Fighter can choose from Champion (simply becoming a better combatant), Battlemaster (gaining access to special combat manoeuvres), or Eldritch Knight (augmenting their combat abilities with  limited spellcasting).
• Feats : Feats are both optional and highly limited. Instead of taking an Ability Score improvement a character may choose a feat instead, which though less numerous are also considerably more powerful, in some cases granting an Ability Score bonus in addition to the feats benefits. For example the Great Weapon Fighter feat essentially combines Power Attack and Cleave, allowing a character with it to make an extra attack after dropping a foe, and giving them the option to take a -5 penalty to an Attack Roll in exchange for a +10 bonus to their damage.
• Skills : Skills have been massively stripped out and simplified. Skill checks are simply based around a D20 roll plus the characters Ability Score and Proficiency bonuses. Rather than having an extensive section for each skill with its uses, bonuses and penalties each instead has a brief overview of what can be done with it. This is one of the things I'm worried about as it strips a lot of depth from the different skills. On a related note Craft skills no longer exist, instead characters can be proficient with a particular set of Tools, allowing them to craft items using them. Whilst I'm on the subject Characters do not have to increase in level to gain proficiency with a particular type of tool (or to learn a new language, instead they can simply spend some time and gold learning to use that particular set of tools or to speak that language. I really like this, and wish more systems allowed for advancement / proficiency independent of character level. 
• Resting :  4th Edition introduced the idea of using Long and Short rests to allow characters to recover their Hit Points and ability uses. 5th Edition continues this tradition with characters able to take a Short Rest (lasting an hour) or a Long Rest (lasting 8 hours) to regain hit points and regain their Spell Slots and ability uses, though the exact benefits of resting vary somewhat from class to class.
• Spellcasting : Spellcasting has changed dramatically. Each primary spellcasting classes spells per day have been greatly reduced, with characters no longer gaining additional spells per day based on high ability scores and even the mightiest magic users only having a single 9th level spell slot per day. To make up for this spells are generally more powerful, with Cantrips having been massively buffed and spells no longer having a caster level, instead if a character wants their spell to be more effective they use a higher level slot to cast it. For example the spell Firebolt is a 0 level cantrip that deals 1d10 damage on a successful Magic Attack Roll, increasing to 4d10 by 17th level. Meanwhile Fireball is a 3rd level spell that deals 8d6 fire damage, 9d6 if cast using a 4th level spell slot, 10d6 if cast using a 5th level spell slot and so on. Overall it seems that spellcasters will use their "per day" slots less often, with their cantrips allowing them to consistently contribute to the adventure even when their spell slots have been expended. I was also pleased to discover than no character class has to prepare their spells in advance any more. With even Clerics and Wizards instead selecting a number of Spells Known per day equal to their Character Level + their Spellcasting Ability Score and then using their spell slots in the same manner as a 3rd edition Sorcerer.

I could go on for some time outlining every single change to the rules, but I don't have the time or inclination. If what I've said so far interests you then I'd advise you to pick up the Players Handbook and give it a look for yourself, if nothing else its an interesting read.

Conclusion :

Overall the game has been simplified considerably, whilst still remaining a sufficient level of complexity to keep it interesting. The mechanics seem to have been streamlined with the intention of speeding gameplay, something I can wholeheartedly support considering how long combat can take in Pathfinder and the like, especially with newer or casual players who don't have the encyclopaedic rules knowledge of long time veterans. Versatility also seems to be the order of the day, with DM's and Players alike encouraged to play around with the rules a little more in interesting ways. Finally there also seems to be an overall drop in power overall for player characters, with there being far less disparity in ability between high and low level characters.

Overall its an interesting update to a 40 year old game, and one that's piqued my curiousity enough to get me to give it a whirl. I will however be withholding judgement until I've actually had a chance to play. Needless to say I'll be sharing my thoughts once I've done so.

Until Next Time
Happy Gaming
Michael